If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

My biggest pet peave with 4x games at the moment, and one of the reasons I like Endless Space, is the lack of love for the expansion side of 4x, and the exploitation side(Endless Space does this the same as Civ, which is its there but you exploit everything).

Fallen enchantress is quite good at the explore side, with missions and monsters to find but even then theres not enough of it. Why can't they put as much emphasis on the explore, exploit and expand side as they do the exterminate side? Or have I missed a whole raft of games they are all about the explore and expand?

Eador is interesting in terms of exploaration - every square you control can be further explored by your heroes a dozen times or so until the exploration counter hits 100%. It can uncover all kinds of ruins, encounters, resources and whatnot. It got repetitive after a while - perhaps there wasn't enough variety - but it was cool and fun while it lasted.

Eador... is certainly interesting. When I played the new version I felt like the game loved few things more than random difficulty spikes. Oh, you're level 2. Here's a dragon in your frontyard. Enjoy. It's not bad, but I never got past the point where it felt like I had to use extreme cheese just to stay alive.

Eador... is certainly interesting. When I played the new version I felt like the game loved few things more than random difficulty spikes. Oh, you're level 2. Here's a dragon in your frontyard. Enjoy. It's not bad, but I never got past the point where it felt like I had to use extreme cheese just to stay alive.

I didn't mind difficulty spikes - do games really have to be streamlined to go smoothly? Do we really want games to have us take baby steps?

But it is quite unbalanced in many other ways. Very few starting tactics are viable and most higher tier units seem totally not worth the investment.

I didn't mind difficulty spikes - do games really have to be streamlined to go smoothly? Do we really want games to have us take baby steps?

"Streamlined" isn't a bad word and it's not about difficulty - it's about removing pointless complexity that doesn't actually translate to deeper gameplay.

I agree that difficulty shouldn't be a gentle curve, but a massive difficulty spike out of character for the game, or without the ability overcome it without major exploitation of gameplay mechanics, isn't something to be praised either. That might work for a Roguelike, where plain old bad luck is just part of the game, but not if you're intending to make strategy the focal point of the game. Even in something like XCOM (oldschool XCOM) bad luck with difficulty spikes plays a part but you can still abort to recover, or sometimes pull off a masterful strategy to overcome. But if it suddenly dropped Mutons and Sectopods onto your first-mission Rookies... well, that's just crap game design.

Nalano's Law - As an online gaming discussion regarding restrictions grows longer, the probability of a post likening the topic to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea approaches one.
Soldant's Law - A person will happily suspend their moral values if they can express moral outrage by doing so.

Or you get something like XCom EU which just gets easier and easier over time and the last mission...was easier than your 4th mission. And well the the end mission design was just bad in general.

My only XCom UFO game (3? 4? difficulty) had a blaster launcher take out like 6 people in an Alien base. I got out with 2 people, recovered and ended up winning. It helped also I was able to get to Mars rather quickly and the Mars surface was easy (was close to elevator).

The original did actually have a bug where no difficulty level beyond "Beginner" actually worked after the first save game... but you're right that the asymmetric warfare side of the original XCOM did fall down once you'd achieved a particular set of tech and provided you didn't do too badly in the early game.

Balance is hard to achieve.

Nalano's Law - As an online gaming discussion regarding restrictions grows longer, the probability of a post likening the topic to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea approaches one.
Soldant's Law - A person will happily suspend their moral values if they can express moral outrage by doing so.

Or you get something like XCom EU which just gets easier and easier over time and the last mission...was easier than your 4th mission. And well the the end mission design was just bad in general.

If I replay XCOM:EU at some point - it is likely, it is a good game - I will switch the difficulty to Insanity after the initial phase. The difficulty curve on classic is not good at all.

Originally Posted by soldant

I agree that difficulty shouldn't be a gentle curve, but a massive difficulty spike out of character for the game, or without the ability overcome it without major exploitation of gameplay mechanics, isn't something to be praised either.

Of course, there are limits. Still, I prefer a game that might suddenly massacre me to a game that I am guaranteed to smoothly proceed, like Borderlands etc.

I didn't mind difficulty spikes - do games really have to be streamlined to go smoothly? Do we really want games to have us take baby steps?

But it is quite unbalanced in many other ways. Very few starting tactics are viable and most higher tier units seem totally not worth the investment.

What? How do you even read that from what I posted? Did your casual hate-o-meter trigger somewhere? I don't mind difficulty or curveballs. But I want a fighting chance. A Level 2 with starting troops against a Dragon has no fighting chance. It's guaranteed game over. Eador does that lots.
A good game throws difficulty curveballs while allowing the player a fighting chance, or any chance to do anything at all, even retreat. The notorious Sigmund, of Crawl fame, is a famous killer of players. He often massacres low level charaters quick and brutally. But he is beatable and there are many ways to deal with him. The equivalent of what Eador does would be to throw a Brimstone Fiend at the player. On the first level.

What? How do you even read that from what I posted? Did your casual hate-o-meter trigger somewhere? I don't mind difficulty or curveballs. But I want a fighting chance. A Level 2 with starting troops against a Dragon has no fighting chance. It's guaranteed game over. Eador does that lots.

I was not being malicious, I apologize if it sounded as such. Lol thought-to-text translation.

Encounters in Eador are voluntary for the most part. Was the dragon somehow forced on you? I know some monsters can devastate your provinces, but there is usually an option to just sacrifice it. Also, the game has saves and autosaves, so.

Isn't this sort of frowned upon now though? In the quest for more difficulty! it seems like people don't like the idea of reloading if you've suffered a disadvantageous position, like it's somehow cheating these days.

Nalano's Law - As an online gaming discussion regarding restrictions grows longer, the probability of a post likening the topic to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea approaches one.
Soldant's Law - A person will happily suspend their moral values if they can express moral outrage by doing so.

Isn't this sort of frowned upon now though? In the quest for more difficulty! it seems like people don't like the idea of reloading if you've suffered a disadvantageous position, like it's somehow cheating these days.

They way it worked in Eador: Genesis was an integral part of the game and did not feel like abuse. Going back one turn was implemented as a feature as your character "going back in time". It worked just fine in this particular game. The game was still tough as nails even with this option. The game also did penalize you every time you went back in time. I'm not sure how it works in Eador: Broken World.

Generally I prefer 4x games to not create a new seed on reload so that the same combat results happen every time. Because if the option is there I'm too tempted to abuse it. That's the closest thing to Ironman I can recall seeing in a 4x.

Isn't this sort of frowned upon now though? In the quest for more difficulty! it seems like people don't like the idea of reloading if you've suffered a disadvantageous position, like it's somehow cheating these days.

It depends on the game, really. Some game design is better for trying different approaches from a single save, others are more suited for the roguelike/ironman thing. For example, the campaign and rounds in Eador are so time-consuming, that restarting/losing them would eat a few lives.

And anyway, difficulty is a matter of taste. Anyone frowning at others playing the game differently is probably slightly confused.

Endless Legend is coming out tomorrow the 24th of April to early access. I am quite looking forward to it, it will be stripped down, only 4 factions and not all research options, and no navy to start with, but I am still very much excited by it. No idea on pricing atm, but I would guess in the 20 - 30 euro range, like endless space was.

Ooooh. Not sure if I'll pick it up, but those devs actually use Early Access correctly. They release a functional game and use the development period as a way to get feedback from the community. In a lot of ways, it is similar to what Arcen is doing with TLF: Release a more or less complete, but stripped down, version of the game. Then use the rest of development time to add in the cut features as what is essentially free DLC.

Steam: Gundato
PSN: Gundato
If you want me on either service, I suggest PMing me here first to let me know who you are.

Of course, there are limits. Still, I prefer a game that might suddenly massacre me to a game that I am guaranteed to smoothly proceed, like Borderlands etc.

Ha, I had very much the same issue with that game. It was painfully easy, unless you skipped some sidequests and went straight to some higher level quests, at which point it turned into a dull grind. I really wanted to like the game, but it rarely came together to generate much excitement.

4x Games are probably my favourite genre. Note I say favourite, not that I am super good at them. I got up to Emperor level in Civ V but it took a long time.

I am on the Civ V side of the divide, never really got into Civ IV and hated the 'stack of doom' style of play.

I have been trying out some other 4x titles recently, including the older ones. I got sucked into Warlock a few months back and it was fun for awhile, the combat system seemed better than Civ V. Melee units could actually assault cities with a chance of winning and you could damage the defenders.

I have some of the other titles mentioned in this thread, interesting reading for the most part.
I would be really interested in a solid recommendation for a space 4x, I'm looking at SotS I and Gal Civ II atm. I have Endless Space but haven't committed a lot of time to it yet.

I have tried getting into CKII but have found it difficult to get the hang of, a shame as I like the setting and concept.

4x Games are probably my favourite genre. Note I say favourite, not that I am super good at them. I got up to Emperor level in Civ V but it took a long time.

I am on the Civ V side of the divide, never really got into Civ IV and hated the 'stack of doom' style of play.

I have been trying out some other 4x titles recently, including the older ones. I got sucked into Warlock a few months back and it was fun for awhile, the combat system seemed better than Civ V. Melee units could actually assault cities with a chance of winning and you could damage the defenders.

I have some of the other titles mentioned in this thread, interesting reading for the most part.
I would be really interested in a solid recommendation for a space 4x, I'm looking at SotS I and Gal Civ II atm. I have Endless Space but haven't committed a lot of time to it yet.

I have tried getting into CKII but have found it difficult to get the hang of, a shame as I like the setting and concept.

I was you for a long time. However, I finally decided to get into CK2 and let me tell you, it's totally worth it. Just go sit down, watch a YouTube series by someone like Arumba and then go play CK2 and see what happens. You're not going to be awesome at it, but it really is the next step and you should try to take it.

I was you for a long time. However, I finally decided to get into CK2 and let me tell you, it's totally worth it. Just go sit down, watch a YouTube series by someone like Arumba and then go play CK2 and see what happens. You're not going to be awesome at it, but it really is the next step and you should try to take it.

Okay I will give another go, after I do the 'research' you recommended. Like I say I really want to like CKII, it doesn't like me atm